Obama on Spot as Rulings Aid Gay Partners

Mar 13, 2009 Full story: www.nytimes.com 500

Just seven weeks into office, President Obama is being forced to confront one of the most sensitive social and political issues of the day: whether the government must provide health insurance benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees.

In separate, strongly worded orders, two judges of the federal appeals court in California said that employees of their court were entitled to health benefits for their same-sex partners under the program that insures millions of federal workers.

But the federal Office of Personnel Management has instructed insurers not to provide the benefits ordered by the judges, citing a 1996 law, the Defense of Marriage Act.

As a presidential candidate, Mr. Obama said he would “fight hard” for the rights of gay couples. As a senator, he sponsored legislation that would have provided health benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees.

Now, Mr. Obama is in a tough spot. If he supports the personnel office on denying benefits to the San Francisco court employees, he risks agitating liberal groups that helped him win election. If he supports the judges and challenges the marriage act, he risks alienating Republicans with whom he is seeking to work on economic, health care and numerous other matters.

Full Story

Since: Mar 09

Orleans, Canada

#24 Mar 13, 2009
Blk and Str8T wrote:
<quoted text>
Look at this narcissistic gay. Of all the things that are at the top of the list this gay dude says equality for all and destroying churches. With all the people losing their jobs and an economy in the toilet all this gay guy can think about is playing house with his boyfriend and destroying churches because it tells the truth of the perverted gay lifestyle.
This is exactly why you gays always lose, your to damn selfish and self indulgent to your own community and not the US community as a whole and the numbers show it.
I can't wait for prop 8 to be upheld and see all the whining on this site and name calling. Then your gonna have to turn right back around and get the votes of the very people you disrespected. Get ready for a lot of hetero(voter) ass kissing (but ya'll gays like that right?)
Just to note, this whole myth that gay people are out to destroy churches. It was started and perpetuated, by the churches. And you've bought it, hook, line, and sinker.

We don't wish to destroy anything. What we want, is equality. Thankfully, I have that in my country, sadly, you do not in yours (You may not see it that way, but, fact is, you *are* being denied a right. It may not be a right you personally would ever exercise, but it's being denied all the same.).

Taxing churches who meddle in politics would not be "destroying" anything, it would merely be enforcing the separation of church and state that you've had on the books for 200 years.

You seemed a bit offput by the fact that someone suggested you may be on the "down low", I would note that in the final words of your post, you stated that you would take pleasure in the viewed emotional suffering of others on this board. Perhaps you didn't see it that way, but that's exactly what you did. Do you truly think that its appropriate to take joy in the pain of anyone, for any reason?

Since: Apr 07

Norristown, PA

#25 Mar 13, 2009
aRodeojock wrote:
Gonna have to call "Bullshit" on you, Mr. Bauer...
FROM THE ARTICLE: Gary L. Bauer, president of American Values, a conservative advocacy group, said that if Mr. Obama extended benefits to same-sex partners of federal workers, he would “provoke a furious grass-roots reaction, reinvigorate the conservative coalition and undermine his efforts to portray himself as a moderate on social issues.”
Polls show that most Americans (while ignorant and stupid about gay marriage) consider health care benefits for same-sex partners a non-issue. Please, by all means, let's see this "furious" reaction you're talking about...
Why do those people *CONSTANTLY* fight against gays as if they would have them all *MURDERED* if they could? Their reactions by now have become NO different from anyone who stubbornly refuses to see the sanctity of one's fellow beings.
Blk and Str8T

San Carlos, CA

#26 Mar 13, 2009
Gabarus wrote:
<quoted text>
Just to note, this whole myth that gay people are out to destroy churches. It was started and perpetuated, by the churches. And you've bought it, hook, line, and sinker.
We don't wish to destroy anything. What we want, is equality. Thankfully, I have that in my country, sadly, you do not in yours (You may not see it that way, but, fact is, you *are* being denied a right. It may not be a right you personally would ever exercise, but it's being denied all the same.).
Taxing churches who meddle in politics would not be "destroying" anything, it would merely be enforcing the separation of church and state that you've had on the books for 200 years.
You seemed a bit offput by the fact that someone suggested you may be on the "down low", I would note that in the final words of your post, you stated that you would take pleasure in the viewed emotional suffering of others on this board. Perhaps you didn't see it that way, but that's exactly what you did. Do you truly think that its appropriate to take joy in the pain of anyone, for any reason?
You have the nerve to talk about freedoms. In weird ass Canada a Priest or Rev. can't even talk about gay issues honestly in their own churches. Shytt they can't even speak passages in the bible that speak against gayness and the lifestyle that includes.

Sorry we don't want (no identity) Canada's idea of freedom here in the U.S. Where my freedom of speech is restricted because gays don't like the truth of the bible. PLEASE.

Also you obviously see just like I do all the godless gays that run around here openly condemning the church and God. Thru out the prop 8 fight they actively went after churches, insanely sometimes even gay friendly churches.

Gays need a clue not marriage..........

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#27 Mar 13, 2009
We'll know where we actually stand with the Administration on this issue within the next week, as the Justice Department's response to the GLAD lawsuits in Massachusetts and Connecticut are due. What we hear from that will tell us just how strenuously, if at all, the Administration is willing to defend the DOMA provisions against the recognition of legal same sex relationships, be they marriages, civil unions, or domestic partnerships.

These cases could represent an easy out for the administration, if the President truly believes in equality for same sex couples, he can have the Justice Department essentially throw in the towel on the question of the constitutionality of those provisions of the law. By doing that he can avoid a battle in Congress over the issue, for which I imagine they would be eternally grateful in not having to deal with it themselves. On the other had, if a vigorous defense of DOMA is offered in the reply, then we'll know we've been screwed over.

Since: Mar 09

Orleans, Canada

#28 Mar 13, 2009
Blk and Str8T wrote:
<quoted text>
You have the nerve to talk about freedoms. In weird ass Canada a Priest or Rev. can't even talk about gay issues honestly in their own churches. Shytt they can't even speak passages in the bible that speak against gayness and the lifestyle that includes.
Sorry we don't want (no identity) Canada's idea of freedom here in the U.S. Where my freedom of speech is restricted because gays don't like the truth of the bible. PLEASE.
Also you obviously see just like I do all the godless gays that run around here openly condemning the church and God. Thru out the prop 8 fight they actively went after churches, insanely sometimes even gay friendly churches.
Gays need a clue not marriage..........
You really have a strange view of my country. Your information is entirely incorrect. Nobodys religious freedoms have been restricted, pastors can preach anything they like to their congregations. As for the allegations you state, Ive never seen anyone "running around, openly condemning the church.". I have seen some speak out about the intolerance and hatred spread by *some* churches.

You fail to realize that your particular interpretation of the Bible, is not the only valid one. It is an edited, incomplete, translated, and retranslated document. There are even multiple versions available to this very day. You are one of whom my grandfather speaks of when he says, "Many folks like to read the bible as if it were written, in English, two hundred years ago." Just because your bible condemns gays, doesn't mean that it is necessaryly correct. You need to stop assuming that you are right. Nobody has any more idea than anyone else what is in "God's" mind, not you, me, Preists, Rabbis, Shamans, or Bayou Voodo people.

I don't know who originally said this, but I find it truly wise, and saw it printed on the billboard of a church a few years ago; "I often am suspicious of those whom know so well what God wants. For it always seems to coincide with their own desires."
Blk and Str8T

San Carlos, CA

#29 Mar 13, 2009
Rick in Kansas wrote:
We'll know where we actually stand with the Administration on this issue within the next week, as the Justice Department's response to the GLAD lawsuits in Massachusetts and Connecticut are due. What we hear from that will tell us just how strenuously, if at all, the Administration is willing to defend the DOMA provisions against the recognition of legal same sex relationships, be they marriages, civil unions, or domestic partnerships.
These cases could represent an easy out for the administration, if the President truly believes in equality for same sex couples, he can have the Justice Department essentially throw in the towel on the question of the constitutionality of those provisions of the law. By doing that he can avoid a battle in Congress over the issue, for which I imagine they would be eternally grateful in not having to deal with it themselves. On the other had, if a vigorous defense of DOMA is offered in the reply, then we'll know we've been screwed over.
You've been screwed over already. Twice by the Cali voters and the rest of the union, DOMA is and has been screwing gays over, the black community (rightfully so) has screwed you over. The female Supreme Court justice who once supported you is now screwing you by the bytch slapping she put down every time you gays put forth your silly arguments. Obama screwed you long time ago multiple times. First when he said he DIDN'T support gay marriage, second when he had a preacher who openly does not support gay marriage do his inaugural ceremony, thirdly when he had a gay priest do a prayer that know one showed up to and wasn't put on the main program or televising.

In a while the number of political screwings your already getting will be in line with the number you get in the gay lifestyle LOL!
Blk and Str8T

San Carlos, CA

#30 Mar 13, 2009
Gabarus wrote:
<quoted text>
You really have a strange view of my country. Your information is entirely incorrect. Nobodys religious freedoms have been restricted, pastors can preach anything they like to their congregations. As for the allegations you state, Ive never seen anyone "running around, openly condemning the church.". I have seen some speak out about the intolerance and hatred spread by *some* churches.
You fail to realize that your particular interpretation of the Bible, is not the only valid one. It is an edited, incomplete, translated, and retranslated document. There are even multiple versions available to this very day. You are one of whom my grandfather speaks of when he says, "Many folks like to read the bible as if it were written, in English, two hundred years ago." Just because your bible condemns gays, doesn't mean that it is necessaryly correct. You need to stop assuming that you are right. Nobody has any more idea than anyone else what is in "God's" mind, not you, me, Preists, Rabbis, Shamans, or Bayou Voodo people.
I don't know who originally said this, but I find it truly wise, and saw it printed on the billboard of a church a few years ago; "I often am suspicious of those whom know so well what God wants. For it always seems to coincide with their own desires."
So Canadians are also ignorant of their own laws or your blatantly lying. There ARE laws on the books in Canada that make it illegal for a Rev, priest, preacher or anyone for that matter to speak against gayness in or outside their church. Matter fact they have specific biblical verses in the law in particular that can't be spoken. Learn the laws of your freedom of speech denied cowardly country.

You come back again spreading your Canadian lies and deceit I'll put up a link directly to your governments website to show you and everyone else Canada's idea of "freedom". Find a less informed individual to spread your lies and propaganda too.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#31 Mar 13, 2009
Blk and Str8T wrote:
(nothing worth repeating)
The reality that you aren't willing to face is that whether the Justice Department chooses to vigorously defend the DOMA prohibition on the federal recognition of legal same sex relationships, or not, in the end they will be reversed. By having creating a suspect class for discriminatory purposes, the authors of this legislation made this part of the law a sitting duck, just begging for a constitutional challenge. If the Administration puts up a fight, it may take longer, but the result will be the same, a rebuke of Congress's attempts at punishment by legislation and federal recognition of legal same sex relationships, be they marriages, civil unions or domestic partnerships, whether the likes of you like it or not.

Face it, you're on the wrong side of history on this one and just like the bigots standing at the schoolhouse door, the memory of you and your irrational ilk won't be kind...

Since: Apr 07

Norristown, PA

#32 Mar 13, 2009
Blk and Str8T wrote:
<quoted text>
You've been screwed over already. Twice by the Cali voters and the rest of the union, DOMA is and has been screwing gays over, the black community (rightfully so) has screwed you over. The female Supreme Court justice who once supported you is now screwing you by the bytch slapping she put down every time you gays put forth your silly arguments. Obama screwed you long time ago multiple times. First when he said he DIDN'T support gay marriage, second when he had a preacher who openly does not support gay marriage do his inaugural ceremony, thirdly when he had a gay priest do a prayer that know one showed up to and wasn't put on the main program or televising.
In a while the number of political screwings your already getting will be in line with the number you get in the gay lifestyle LOL!
I find it strange -- if you are indeed black -- that your own history shows what injustice has been done to you; yet gays have had it *even worse*, and you support condemnation against them. It's almost like you're black, yet a member of the KKK or the Phelps group (a neo-Nazi, etc. etc.).

Since: Mar 09

Orleans, Canada

#33 Mar 13, 2009
If you have proof of these laws, then go right ahead and post them. There was one case, a year or two ago, where a "preacher" (Near as I know, he was not recognized by any official church) attempted to take out an advertisement in a public newspaper, using a mix of opinions and bible verses to condemn gays, and pretty well call for violence against them. The newspaper refused to run the ad, and he sued, he had tried this tactic on several different occasions, and this was the first time he successfully picked a fight. He lost in our courts. But nobody told him he couldn't preach in any courts, and you can read through the law books all you wish, I doubt you will find a specific bible verse in any of them. If you can prove me wrong, please do, I will be happy to have learned something new.

Your hostility itself however is very telling. I notice that you seem to feel a need to ridicule or talk down to anyone who disagrees with you, do you ever stop to consider why you have developed this defence mechanism?

Since: Mar 09

Orleans, Canada

#34 Mar 13, 2009
*correction

Nobody told him he couldnt preach in any *church*, not courts, my mistake!
Blk and Str8T

San Carlos, CA

#35 Mar 13, 2009
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>
The reality that you aren't willing to face is that whether the Justice Department chooses to vigorously defend the DOMA prohibition on the federal recognition of legal same sex relationships, or not, in the end they will be reversed. By having creating a suspect class for discriminatory purposes, the authors of this legislation made this part of the law a sitting duck, just begging for a constitutional challenge. If the Administration puts up a fight, it may take longer, but the result will be the same, a rebuke of Congress's attempts at punishment by legislation and federal recognition of legal same sex relationships, be they marriages, civil unions or domestic partnerships, whether the likes of you like it or not.
Face it, you're on the wrong side of history on this one and just like the bigots standing at the schoolhouse door, the memory of you and your irrational ilk won't be kind...
All you have is talk and conjecture that has nothing to do with actual law. Thats why the Supreme Court Justices were irritably verbally slapping you gays arguments when they brought those weak legal stances to them. You talk fantasy not facts. Gays in the US haven't made one step forward but to make fools of themselves on the world stage with your cowardly actions. And thats a side of history I'd rather not be associated with, a bunch of losers and whiners begging judges for special rights.(cause you know how the people feel when they vote)
Blk and Str8T

San Carlos, CA

#36 Mar 13, 2009
rdg1234 wrote:
<quoted text>
I find it strange -- if you are indeed black -- that your own history shows what injustice has been done to you; yet gays have had it *even worse*, and you support condemnation against them. It's almost like you're black, yet a member of the KKK or the Phelps group (a neo-Nazi, etc. etc.).
I don't support or condone the gay lifestyle or their feelings of discrimination. Your the one deceitfully trying to tie my black history to your gay perversions and tell me how I should act and that has nothing to do with me or my feelings about gays whining for special rights. Call it what you want but blacks by a clear majority don't support your views or lifestyle by a long shot, get over it!

Since: Mar 09

Orleans, Canada

#37 Mar 13, 2009
Like when you got "special rights" to marry a white woman if you want, in spite of all the black women who are out there who you *could* marry instead? The Majority would have voted against that right up to about 10 years ago, guess you should have waited eh? Yeah. Courts never get it right do they?
Blk and Str8T

San Carlos, CA

#38 Mar 13, 2009
Gabarus wrote:
If you have proof of these laws, then go right ahead and post them. There was one case, a year or two ago, where a "preacher" (Near as I know, he was not recognized by any official church) attempted to take out an advertisement in a public newspaper, using a mix of opinions and bible verses to condemn gays, and pretty well call for violence against them. The newspaper refused to run the ad, and he sued, he had tried this tactic on several different occasions, and this was the first time he successfully picked a fight. He lost in our courts. But nobody told him he couldn't preach in any courts, and you can read through the law books all you wish, I doubt you will find a specific bible verse in any of them. If you can prove me wrong, please do, I will be happy to have learned something new.
Your hostility itself however is very telling. I notice that you seem to feel a need to ridicule or talk down to anyone who disagrees with you, do you ever stop to consider why you have developed this defence mechanism?
I won't provide a link because it's a damn shame I have to teach you about your own laws in a country I don't even live in. But look up the Canadian criminal code Section 319 (the religious speech restrictions are included in that code) that deals with hate speech.

And again no we don't want your weird freedom of speech denying Canadian laws here in America we actually have an identity and don't put up with that crap here in the States.
Blk and Str8T

San Carlos, CA

#39 Mar 13, 2009
Gabarus wrote:
Like when you got "special rights" to marry a white woman if you want, in spite of all the black women who are out there who you *could* marry instead? The Majority would have voted against that right up to about 10 years ago, guess you should have waited eh? Yeah. Courts never get it right do they?
That was a special right white women fought to gain for obvious reasons LOL......bwaaaahaaaaa

But seriously I keep telling you gays that the black civil rights movement and whatever it is gays call themselves doing are two distinct and separate things. Thats why the outcomes of the two movements are clearly different as you just clearly demonstrated with interracial marriage in comparison to gay marriage. Fight your own fight and stop piggy backing nobody sees you gays comparisons and most are offended by them.

Since: Mar 09

Orleans, Canada

#40 Mar 13, 2009
Blk and Str8T wrote:
<quoted text>
I won't provide a link because it's a damn shame I have to teach you about your own laws in a country I don't even live in. But look up the Canadian criminal code Section 319 (the religious speech restrictions are included in that code) that deals with hate speech.
And again no we don't want your weird freedom of speech denying Canadian laws here in America we actually have an identity and don't put up with that crap here in the States.
Oh no, you're not gonna get off that easy. YOU made the claim, YOU back it up. It's not *my* job to do your research for you.

I'm not sure what you're referring to as an identity. I am finding it very interesting that you seem to love denigrating my country. I wonder what fuels your anger. Its very apparent. And I also notice that you've completely ignored what I said about other churches and biblical translations, if you truly believe in your bible, shouldn't you at least attempt to back up why your interpretation is correct, rather than screaming about how bad my country is?

Since: Mar 09

Orleans, Canada

#41 Mar 13, 2009
Blk and Str8T wrote:
<quoted text>
That was a special right white women fought to gain for obvious reasons LOL......bwaaaahaaaaa
But seriously I keep telling you gays that the black civil rights movement and whatever it is gays call themselves doing are two distinct and separate things. Thats why the outcomes of the two movements are clearly different as you just clearly demonstrated with interracial marriage in comparison to gay marriage. Fight your own fight and stop piggy backing nobody sees you gays comparisons and most are offended by them.
Oh, a big dicked black man joke. How mature. What are you? Twelve?

There are very apt reasons the two cases are compared. Loving v Virginia established marriage as a fundamental right. It did not specify any genders at all. Whether you happen to like that or not, it's the truth. The arguments against such marriages were virtually the same, "It's unnatural", "It goes against the Bible", "Traditional marriage will be undermined." "Freedom of Religion and speech will be trounced."

Are you aware that there are churches in the Southern USA who, to this day, will not marry an interracial couple? We may find this repugnant, but you know what? Under the laws of your country, they have that right. Nobody is asking for churches to be forced to marry gay couples, and if you think that's what's happening, you've been woefully misled.

If you think the movement regarding Interracial Marriage and Gay Marriage are so distinct, please, tell me how. What is so different? It's people, human beings, fighting for the right to marry the person they love. No more, no less. I see the similarities a mile away, if you can't, then you're willfully blind.
Blk and Str8T

San Carlos, CA

#42 Mar 13, 2009
Gabarus wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh no, you're not gonna get off that easy. YOU made the claim, YOU back it up. It's not *my* job to do your research for you.
I'm not sure what you're referring to as an identity. I am finding it very interesting that you seem to love denigrating my country. I wonder what fuels your anger. Its very apparent. And I also notice that you've completely ignored what I said about other churches and biblical translations, if you truly believe in your bible, shouldn't you at least attempt to back up why your interpretation is correct, rather than screaming about how bad my country is?
This law is very easy to look up "Canadian criminal code Section 319".

I just wanted to make sure it's seen again so people can look it up on their own and see how uninformed you are of your own countries freedom of speech denying rules. I don't like Canada because they have no identity and legally they go for anything whether it strips rights from other citizens are not. The only thing I can give Canada props for is their crime rates.

As far as the Bible goes so I can make this quick, the parts of the bible that talk about gayness have no translation issues tho their are areas of the Bible up for debate, the gay issue in the Bible is so clear and straightforward is has not been lost in translation. Matter fact Romans which is the most clear on the gay issue is one of the easiest books to translate because it's not one of the older biblical books.
Blk and Str8T

San Carlos, CA

#43 Mar 13, 2009
Gabarus wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, a big dicked black man joke. How mature. What are you? Twelve?
There are very apt reasons the two cases are compared. Loving v Virginia established marriage as a fundamental right. It did not specify any genders at all. Whether you happen to like that or not, it's the truth. The arguments against such marriages were virtually the same, "It's unnatural", "It goes against the Bible", "Traditional marriage will be undermined." "Freedom of Religion and speech will be trounced."
Are you aware that there are churches in the Southern USA who, to this day, will not marry an interracial couple? We may find this repugnant, but you know what? Under the laws of your country, they have that right. Nobody is asking for churches to be forced to marry gay couples, and if you think that's what's happening, you've been woefully misled.
If you think the movement regarding Interracial Marriage and Gay Marriage are so distinct, please, tell me how. What is so different? It's people, human beings, fighting for the right to marry the person they love. No more, no less. I see the similarities a mile away, if you can't, then you're willfully blind.
They are different because you want to redefine a thousand year old institution into something else as to achieve special rights by saying you were denied something that by definition doesn't belong to you i.e. marriage. Black is my race an undeniable fact of my existence which is clearly seen. So the rights denied me because of my race are clearly seen.

Then you have gays..........What is a gay person really. Some say their born that way, some say they were molested, some or bi and go back and forth, some or closeted or down lo, some are gay pedophile priest, some are just cross-dressers, some are members of NAMBLA. You see because gayness is clearly a LIFESTYLE it can't even be clearly defined thats why your community calls itself GLBT. A big pot of unclear definitions of gay that don't even agree on what they want.

Do you really want me to go on?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Health Insurance Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Many kids fall through gaps in dental care 17 hr Wally West 14
Determining Your Family Dental Care Needs 21 hr Gerald Vonberger 1
Department of Defense awards Humana Military ne... (May '09) Tue Leachmark707 9
Health bills can hide 'drive-by' costs Oct 24 The Sensible 1 6
Who in an insurance company is responsible for ... Oct 23 Trying to Help 1
Insurance: Pregnant US Citizen Abroad Moving Ba... Oct 23 LuluSeoul 1
Roberts: Health care is not a right (Jul '12) Oct 20 Sage 288

Health Insurance People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE